Posted!

Join the Conversation

Comments

Welcome to our new and improved comments, which are for subscribers only.
This is a test to see whether we can improve the experience for you.
You do not need a Facebook profile to participate.

You will need to register before adding a comment.
Typed comments will be lost if you are not logged in.

Please be polite.
It's OK to disagree with someone's ideas, but personal attacks, insults, threats, hate speech, advocating violence and other violations can result in a ban.
If you see comments in violation of our community guidelines, please report them.

Pitino's lawsuit against Adidas more about reputation than repayment | Tim Sullivan

Rick Pitino has put on the full-court press. He will contest every inch, challenge every shot and strive to wear down opponents through the force of his will.

Fired as head basketball coach at the University of Louisville on Monday, Pitino has responded just as you would expect, with aggressive action. He put his house up for sale even before his lawyer’s last-ditch effort to save his job. He has already filed one lawsuit (against Adidas) with another likely to follow (against the University of Louisville). He has proclaimed his innocence in an ESPN interview with Jay Bilas. He looks as if he last slept during the Carter administration.

Pitino was never the type to leave quietly, and this exit has been amplified by righteousness and victimization. Though he has played this scene before, in response to the tawdry revelations of Katina Powell, Pitino never fails to deliver a fresh performance.

“They took my love and my passion away from me,” Pitino told Bilas in explaining his lawsuit against Adidas. “... So they are responsible for their actions. As I take ownership for two (coaching) hires, they must take ownership for what they did.”

Pitino’s complaint is predicated, perhaps flimsily, on perception; that Adidas’ “outrageous and unlawful conspiracy” in which the company allegedly attempted to help funnel bribes to the family of Brian Bowen created an appearance that the coach “had known about, participated in, acquiesced in, or otherwise condoned these outrageous practices.”

Connecting those dots could be difficult. No one from Adidas or the University of Louisville has accused Pitino of complicity in the alleged bribery scheme. Holding a company responsible for the suspicions of more distant observers seems like a reach that would require Ray Spalding's wingspan.

Though the suit seeks compensatory and punitive damages, its real purpose may be image-repair; “Coach Pitino’s vehicle for proving that he had nothing to do with Adidas’ outrageous, wrongful and illegal conspiracy.”

Len Simon, who has taught sports law at Duke, USC and the University of San Diego, says Pitino’s case may have more public relations value than legal merit. He speculated that the suit could be designed to secure documents that could be useful in a case against the University of Louisville.

“They (Adidas) don’t have any obligation to avoid causing harm to third parties,” Simon said. “It’s like suing a bank robber because he was robbing a bank when you needed money and the bank was closed.”

Nonetheless, Pitino probably deserves at least a little sympathy at this stage. The end of his Louisville tenure is most clearly traced to the misdeeds of his subordinates rather than his own conduct; to Andre McGee’s transactions with Powell and the alleged bribery scheme the FBI found in the recruiting of Bowen. Yet after three major scandals in less than a decade — the first stemming from his dalliance with Karen Sypher — Pitino's plausible deniability is less persuasive and his reservoir of goodwill has run dry.

Still, a man is entitled to fight for his reputation, particularly if he feels wronged, and Pitino’s suit against Adidas sends an unambiguous message about his culpability. Ask yourself this: If there were any evidence of his involvement in bribing Bowen’s family as an inducement to sign with Louisville, would Pitino risk being exposed and possibly perjuring himself by going to court?

Faced with the prospect of prison time, the Adidas representatives involved in Bowen’s recruitment would surely choose to implicate a bigger fish if it could mean a lighter sentence. The feds, in turn, are likely counting on incriminated informants to expand their investigation and convict higher-profile culprits.

Thus if Pitino has anything to hide, it had better be carefully concealed and free of his fingerprints. Though his lawsuit against Adidas does not necessarily prove he played no sinister part in Bowen’s recruitment, it is ample evidence that he has no fear of being found out. If anything nefarious transpired during Pitino’s phone calls with James Gatto, the Adidas director of global basketball marketing, no evidence has surfaced to prove it.

“Any communication with Gatto would not be surprising,” Pitino’s attorney, Steve Pence, wrote in his submission to the University of Louisville Athletic Association (ULAA). “... At no time, however, have Coach Pitino and Gatto discussed — overtly, covertly, in code, through nuance, or in any other way — the provision of improper benefits to any UL basketball player or recruit.”

It is possible to believe Rick Pitino didn't know without believing he should have kept his job. As he continues to fight for his reputation, that distinction may be his most attainable goal.

Tim Sullivan can be reached at (502) 582-4650, tsullivan@courier-journal.com or @TimSullivan714 on Twitter.